Claus Reinke wrote:
> cabal:
> - the separation into interpreter/compiler and resource as Setup
> does not set up the right mindset in users. for instance, you can
> "runhaskell Setup.hs --help" as for most unixy tools, but who'd
> think of that in this situation, and how much does it help?
>> + add a dedicated command "cabal", which does nothing more
> than "runhaskell Setup", but is more memorable and suggestive
cabal-setup does this, but wasn't included with the latest release of Cabal. It
should be in the next one, I hope. The plan is to deprecate 'runhaskell
Setup.lhs' in favour of 'cabal-setup'. Feel free to suggest changing the name
to 'cabal', although some might argue that 'cabal-get' is the high-level tool
and should therefore get the name 'cabal' instead.
> - cabal/darcs/haddock are no replacement for minimal help texts:
> cabal should require the existence of a README
absolutely, this has occurred to me too. There should be a stanard Cabal README
file, and Don's mkcabal tool could drop it in the tree.
Cheers,
Simon